On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 05:37:18PM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
> Technically the DAM has the ability to act to remove a DD (per Debian
> Constitution 8.1 item 2), but the information I can gather so far seems to
> indicate that the DAM won't expell a DD for disciplanary problems.
FWIW, that is not correct. There have been other cases of member
expulsions for, as you put it, "disciplinary" reasons, but for various
good reasons not all of them are discussed publicly --- one thing is
expelling a developer, another is putting that up to ever lasting public
shaming on the web. DAM can and do expel for disciplinary reasons,
either on their own initiative, or following up to initiatives by other
project members. Whether that is done "enough" or not, of course, is a
separate matter.
> That might be one explanation for the steady drop in new bug reports:
That's a bit preposterous, imho, the huge popularity of some of our
derivatives---which, in the general case, both benefits from our work
and give back to us so that we benefit from theirs---is a much more
simpler explanation of those numbers. Beware of simplistic explanation.
> As a bug reporter dealing with a misbehaving maintainer, this is what I would
> want:
>
> 1. A clear place to report the misbehavior
> 2. A set of guidelines maintainers should follow
> 3. A public dialog about the misbehavior with some Debian authority
> along with the misbehaving maintainer.
>
> Note on (3): In the cases I've dealt with, the misbehavior was in public bug
> reports, so the discussion of the misbehavior should likewise be public.
On the other hand, the above are indeed reasonable community
expectations.
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . zack@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o
Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o
Debian Project Leader . . . . . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o .
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »